BC Liberal candidate exposed as a vicious homophobe
Now, it has been revealed that the BC Liberal candidate in Mission-Maple Ridge made viciously homophobic remarks.
http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/BC-Politics/2009/04/24/NDP-attacks-Liber...
Here is a choice tidbit:
"There are other moral issues that large segments of our society do not see eye to eye: gambling, abortion, adultery, pornography. I believe that homosexuality fits in this category."
This guy ran and lost as a CPC candidate in the last federal election. Considering all the squawking about a pretty innocuous comment by Mable Elmore, not to mention the ridiculous stuff about Lam and is perfectly innocent facebook pictures - I expect nothing less than a front page editorrial in the Vancouver Sun demanding that this pig be forced to resign as BC Liberal candidate and that Gordon Campbell give an abject apology on prime time television.
I also hope that the high priests of so-called environmentalism that have been spreading this myth about Campbell being so wonderful because of his carbon tax crap - will acknowldge that this guy is an example of the crap that you get when you support the BC Reform Party that masquerades as the BC Liberals!
This guy ran and lost as a CPC candidate in the last federal election.
He ran and lost in 2006. He won the Conservative nomination in 2008, but for an unexplained reason they didn't want him. Just goes to show, Harper wanted nothing to do with this whackjob, but Gordo welcomed him with open arms.
Well stock. you will be waiting a long long time for coverage of this. A don't expect a Gordo apology or a resignation, and don't even expect some voices here to demand a resignation and apology from Gordo, it would not fit well with their plans to continually discredit the NDP, over nothing. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if some start blaming the NDP and James, or at least trying to, for not doing anything about this, to try to make it appear as if it is the NDP's lack, as opposed to placing blame where it should lay.
And the high priests as you call them, will not say a word against Gordo either, as poof there goes patronage appointments.
Didn't the NDP candidate quit because someone in the party either the leader or the campaign manager basically told him too - Gordon Campbell and Mary McNeill and the MSM can complain all they want about an NDP candidate and his or her failings but they can't do anything about getting someone from another party to quit running .
Let the people of Maple Ridge - Mission decide.
Just as I thought!
I agree with what's been written above: we shouldn't hold our breath for this to become big news, and I doubt an apology or firing is in the cards. There's absolutely no mention of this story on the CBC website (which still has a headline for the Ray Lam imbroglio). The Sun's website has a story under the headline 'Gay NDP candidate offended by "disturbing homophobic comments" made by Liberal running in Maple Ridge-Mission'. The tone of the headline (and the contents of the story) makes it sound like a) it's a partisan attack b) Spencer Herbert is some sort of overly-sensitive whiner and c) only gay people are/should be offended.
Here's Dalton's 'apology' from the story (sorry, still don't know how to use the block quote feature on this new-fangled board):
"First and foremost, I want to apologize for the e-mail from 12 years ago that has been raised by the NDP. If I have caused offence, I apologize unequivocally. The e-mail in question was never intended to be offensive or hurtful to anybody. However, I can understand how it could be easily misconstrued. That is fully my fault and I take responsibility.
"For 15 years, I've devoted my life to being a teacher. I've always tried to ensure I respect diversity in our communities and honour the contribution of persons from all different backgrounds and walks of life.
"I fully recognize and applaud the significant contributions of the gay community. I would never want to cause offence to them or anyone else. It was never my intention to pass judgment on any individual and I have always been respectful of every individual's right to privacy and self-expression. Nor is it my intention as a person running for public office to impose my personal values on anyone or to revisit an issue that has been historically divisive and that our communities have endeavoured to move beyond.
"I believe it is important that people are respectful of one another and that public officials represent the full diversity of their communities. I have always tried to follow that principle as an individual, as a teacher, and I would do so as an MLA.
"If Spencer Herbert or any other individuals have taken offence in their reading of this 12-year-old e-mail, I again extend my unequivocal apology."
The disconnect between the apology and what he wrote in the e-mail is quite breathtaking.
Some admittedly less serious (but more ironic) allegations against another Liberal candidate (and cabinet minister): B.C. Safety minister suspended from driving for 'excessive speeding'.
How does this goof manage to stay in Cabinet? Honestly. (I wonder - do B.C. cabmins get ministerial cars and drivers?)
People are illinformed here. Thanks to the pro Campbell media here like Canwest Global, CTV, Vancouver Sun and province. They do not tell the people anything positive about the NDP and show undying never ending love for El Gordo...it really is quite sickening.
Wow. The Van Dongen affair seems to have spurred the CBC into action at least. They've combed through all the candidates' driving records and have discovered two Liberal candidates with serious blotches on their record. One, Jesse McClinton, candidate in Victoria-Swan Lake, was actually charged with impaired driving but pled guilty to a lesser included offence. The other, Laura McDiarmid, candidate in Vancouver-West End, has racked up dozens and dozens of parking tickets and other traffic violations, and is now trying to hide behind the excuse that as a professional limo driver, it goes with the territory. Story is here: 'Candidate vetting questioned after bad driving records surface.'
When asked to comment, Campbell basically said "look, I don't know the driving records of all 85 candidates." But one would expect something a serious as a criminal charge to have come up in the vetting process, no? For his part, McClinton refuses to resign, stating that he shouldn't be judged for a 'youthful indiscretion'. Yet the same article refers to Ray Lam being forced to step down over something that truly fits the definition of youthful indiscretion, and frankly is far more mild than what McClinton was accused of.
Fortunately for us, neither McClinton nor McDiarmid has a hope in hell of winning their respective seats, but it's interesting to note that Campbell is not asking for their resignations. I don't know if that reflects badly on Campbell, or on the NDP for throwing its candidates under the bus over much more minor issues.
One last point: the CBC site still doesn't have anything up about Marc Dalton, but they've still got a headline for the Ray Lam resignation story.
One thing I want to emphasize is that Laura McDiarmid has actually injured someone with her bad driving.
"McDiarmid was even sued over her driving in connection with a multi-vehicle accident in April 2001 in Vancouver.
A woman injured in the crash took McDiarmid to court, claiming the Liberal candidate was driving at excessive speed, failed to comply with rules of the road and was driving without due care and attention. The lawsuit was settled out of court."
There seems to be an attitude out there that excuses bad driving because so many do it. Let ye without sin cast the first stone, or whatever.
As someone who drives, rides a bike and walks in Vancouver, I can attest to the decline in safety on our streets. I'd love to be able to save the Earth by bike commuting but I fear that once assholes like McDiarmid and Van Dongen are done with me, I'll be a bloody corpse on the side of the road.
And I swear, the next time a driver tries to run me down when I'm walking in a crosswalk, I will cast the first stone (maybe I'll start keeping one in my pocket).
Wasn't there a former NDP MLA who when running for mayor of Vancouver had a small problem of getting catch with fare evasion by the Translink cops and instead of paying it decided to challenge it before other spin doctors suggested he pay it and get on with the campaign.
Basement dweller - be careful if you were walking or biking or even driving down Davie Street you could have been killed by a drunk City Councillor who continued to drive for some time after the offense.
In both cases the candidates did not resign and the people elected/re-elected them.
Instead of having the Party leaders and their truth squad spin doctors deciding a candidate worthiness let the voter be the ultimate judge.
Don't these incidents with Dalton and Van Dongen and McClinton and McDiarmid - show us that the BC Liberals have a really sloppy and incompetent vetting process and therefore would be incompetent at managing the economy???? (We all know that if a bunch of NDP candidates were exposed like this it would get ten times as much publicity and the party's whole readiness for government would be called into question)
It is more than sickening, it is an attack upon democracy and democratic process, and it indicates they are in the business of doing nothing but purveying propaganda. People shou;ld be boycotting their sponsors, and telling the sponsors why, and writing letters letters to Canwest stating their anger and what they are going to do about it.
If we the citizens allow them to get away with this, they will continue to obscure, deflect and distort.
I don't know much about Dalton, but his comments hardly make him as a "Vicious homophobe". Call the hyperbole police!
"I am not against homosexuals as people, but I do not support their lifestyle choices. I believe homosexuality is a moral issue. Most of us agree on many morals: respect, honesty, kindness. There are also many behaviours and acts that most of us would not condone: rape, robbery, assault, drunken driving, pedophilia, incest and so on.
There are other moral issues that large segments of our society do not see eye to eye: gambling, abortion, adultery, pornography. I believe that homosexuality fits in this category."
1. He says he doesn't not support their lifestyle choices. This is not being a "vicious" homophobe. Far from it. While looking at homosexuality as a matter of 'morality' is rather silly, his view is shared by many religious types. This hardly makes it "vicious".
2. His statement about "other moral issues that large segments of our society do not see eye to eye" is more factual and truthful than anything else. It is true that many people don't see eye to eye on this issues, and those issues are quite divisive. How is this wrong?
If you are going to rip into the guy, do so with better evidence at your disposal. The comments in that article are quite mild. Yes, he does not condone homosexuality, and considers it a 'moral' issue, but he is not calling for mobs of people to beat up on Davie Street couples. Overreactions do not help your case.
He has no right to opine on anyone's lifestyle choices, that he presumes to do so, and to call it a morality issues, is vicious homphobia. Plus he is not supportive of human rights on the broader the scale either, and is apparently misogynist to boot.
.
Moreover, he is a fucking hyprocrit, at best, as he lists drunken drivig as one of his worst morality issue issues, ranked right up there with pedeophilia and incest, yet he is running to serve in the Campbell government.
The guy also wanted to run for the federal Tories and they vetoed him because he didn't get by their vetting process. Dalton is known to be an extreme right religious conservative with ties to holy roller churches. I guess it just goes to show that when someone is considered too much of a wingnut for the Harper Tories - they can still be welcomed with open arms by Gordon campbell.
Remind and Stockholm - If Tim Stevenson were to move into your electoral district or you were to move down here to Vancouver and he was running for the NDP in a provincial election or Vision municipally would you welcome him with open arms and work tirelessly to get him elected EVEN though he is a convicted DUI and withheld the info until his day in court. Would you vote and work for a mayorality candidate who was caught with fare evasion on Translink and only paid the fine after it became public and he realized it might hurt his chances.
Many on here are being critical of the various parties vetting process and just who they are allowing/not allowing to run or stay in the races. So what would you do in the following situations if you were on a vetting committee.
Is getting caught smoking a bong or posting it on the internet.
Is drinking and driving and having a criminal record.
Is being married and divorce and remarried.
Has admittied they broke the law and toked up but where never charged
Would you disallow anyone who belongs to a church because that church has views different from yours or because they belonged to a church
Would you disallow anyone who supports the right of the State of Israel to exist.
Would you disallow any one who support Canadian troops in Afganistan.
Would you disallow anyone who doesn't have a union membership.
OR WOULD YOU ALLOW THE PEOPLE OF A RIDING OR REGION TO DECIDE AT THE BALLOT BOX.
Van Dongen has quit cabinet but continues to run:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090427.wbcsolgen042...
The answers to what was posted vary by circumstances. here is how i see it:
So what would you do in the following situations if you were on a vetting committee.
If getting caught smoking a bong or posting it on the internet.
I'm of two minds on this one. The thing is that smoking a "bong" and especially smoking a bong while driving - is still illegal and so I don't have a problem with someone having smoked pot - but when it gets to the point of them stuffing 30 joints in their mouth at the same time and driving a car - then it starts to make the candidate (and the party they are running for) an object of ridicule.
Is drinking and driving and having a criminal record.
If someone has a drinking and driving conviction or commits some other criminal while they are in office (such as stealing a ring) - they should resign if they have a cabinet portfolio and maybe not run again. If the conviction happened in the past and it was never hidden - then i have no problem with letting them run.
Is being married and divorce and remarried.
No problem at all.
Has admittied they broke the law and toked up but where never charged
I have no objection to them running.
Would you disallow anyone who belongs to a church because that church has views different from yours or because they belonged to a church.
I don't care what church someone belongs to, but I expect someone who runs for the party I support to not have beliefs that are diametrically opposed to what my party believes in. If someone is an anti-gay anti-choice fanatic - they are free to run - for the Christian Heritage Party - but they should not be allowed to pollute the NDP or other parties that claim to believe in human rights.
Would you disallow anyone who supports the right of the State of Israel to exist.
Of course not - but i might disallow someone who thinks Israel should not exist at all and has used really hateful language calling for a massacre of all Israelis to accomplish that.
Would you disallow any one who support Canadian troops in Afganistan.
We ALL support the troops - we just want to show our support by bringing them home and out of harms way.
Would you disallow anyone who doesn't have a union membership.
Of course not - most people can't be a union member even if they wanted to be. If you are a lawyer or are self-employed etc... you cannot be in a union by definition.
First, I do not equate a transit fare mistake to a DUI, nor withholding info about a DUI. Way to minimize a DUI conviction, eh.
Nor do I equate misogyny and vicious homophobia, and anti-human rights sentiments, with a DUI, nor toking up.
The rest of your silly rant is just that.
He has no right to opine on anyone's lifestyle choices, that he presumes to do so, and to call it a morality issues, is vicious homphobia. Plus he is not supportive of human rights on the broader the scale either, and is apparently misogynist to boot.
What is this? Saudi Arabia? Of course he has a right to opine on someone's lifestyle choices, just as I do yours, and you do mine. Opinions are like a-holes, after all.
Now, back to my original point: The article and quote referenced were very mild. This individual may very well be a homophobe and various other things, but the quote and article do not show that. If you want to prove your point, give some evidence!
It does show that, only someone of like mind would think not.
A no as an elected official or someone seeking election he does not have a right to advocate positions that are anti-human rights..
.
"What is this? Saudi Arabia? Of course he has a right to opine on someone's lifestyle choices, just as I do yours, and you do mine."
I agree. He has every right to have hateful views. But the public should be made well aware of those views so that they don't accidentally vote for him and if his party let's him be one of their candicdates then it implies that they condone his views.
Unless the BC Liberals as a party agree that homosexuality is immoral and should be compared to prostition or pornography - they should expel him and tell him he is welcome to run as a candidate of the Christian Heritage Party.
The BC Liberals don't seem to care one way or another about homosexuality. They have Mary Polak as a candidate in Langley, after all. Gordo, himself, said he pretty much doesn't care. (not that you can trust him all that much).
If anything, Gordo's party will pick candidates who pander to a specific area. If Langley is largely anti-gay, then Polak will score a lot of easy votes. The media hasn't made a huge issue out of it, so it hasn't hurt the BC Liberals significantly.
IF the (CanWest) media made a big ruckus out of it, and there was a visible backlash, the Liberals would probably be 'gay friendly'.
Truth #1: truth is that homosexuality is not a big ticket issue for many British Columbians, especially with the doom-and-gloom economic news.
Truth #2: Gordo tailors his party's (ie. his) views to what will win, not necessarily what is important.
Why do you suppose there wre shrieking headlines over a very innocuous use of the word "zionist" by Mable Elmore - which even i admit was pretty inoffensive - but when BC Liberals spew hate against gays and lesbians - the media tries to turn a blind eye. Why the double standard???
Is getting caught smoking a bong or posting it on the internet.
Is drinking and driving and having a criminal record.
Is being married and divorce and remarried.
Has admittied they broke the law and toked up but where never charged
Would you disallow anyone who belongs to a church because that church has views different from yours or because they belonged to a church
Would you disallow anyone who supports the right of the State of Israel to exist.
Would you disallow any one who support Canadian troops in Afganistan.
Would you disallow anyone who doesn't have a union membership.
Smoking a bong, I'd certainly have no problem with, provided it was in the past. While I think marijuana should be legal, I can see why having a candidate flagrantly breaking the existing law wouldn't be appropriate. I've certainly smoked it during my lifestime and don't feel as if it should reflect on who I am and what I do today.
DUI I think is incredibly serious. it's not some juvenile little thing. It is recklessly irresponsible and puts other peoples' lives at risk. I'd be hard-pressed to accept someone with a DUI unless there was some very serious contrition.
Being divorced? Is that really a consideration? Sometimes marriages don't work it out. It sucks but it happens. Assuming the divorce wasn't a result of abuse or chronic adultery or anything like that, I say stay the hell out of candidates private lives.
We ahve freedome of religion. Someone can belong to any church, synogogue or mosque they like or be an avid atheist. I'll judge them by their polciies and actions not on personal religious beleifs.
Eliminate everyone who supports israel's right to exist and you'll ahve a pretty thing (and scary) slate of candidates indeed.
Eliminating people without a union membership elimiantes all sorts of people whose jobs simply don't require that. it would be absurd.
the only thing on your lsit that would bother me would be the DUI because in that case you're talking about blatant disregard for public safety. Aside from that, I could give a shit about a politician's sex life, religious convictions, etc.
Thanks Stockholm for taking the time to answer my questions - ultimately it should be the people who decide who gets elected.
Peter3 - I think the deadline has passed for parties to change the candidates so the voters are stuck with those who might have sins come to light in the next two weeks of campaigning.
Its not too late for some of these creepy BC Liberals to pull out. In the last federal election, the NDP's Julian West quit as candidate though it was too late to take his name off the ballot and similarly there was that woman running for the Liberals who had to drop out after the deadline when it came out that she had written that the Mossad knew in advance about 9/11. In both cases their names stayed on the ballot - they just got very, very few votes.
I agree that the people should decide who gets elected - but parties also have right to decide who should represent them. If a party doesn't want to be represented by a felon or a vicious homophobe then that person is free to run as an independent or for a party that will have them like the Christian Heritage Party.
Okay. Let's do a round up, shall we?
- Liberals-or-Greens-who-pretend-to-be-New-Democrats are faux-outraged by the NDP's natural resource and tax policies.
- New Democrats who would probably vote for the likes of Tim Stevenson are faux-outraged that some Liberals have parking tickets.
- Liberals are expressing faux-outrage that NDP candidates do not look like Grant Wood paintings in their private facebook albums.
- New Democrats are faux-outraged by other New Democrats for saying the word "Zionist".
- And now New Democrats, including the New Democrat I plan to vote for (Herbert in Van-West End), are faux-outraged that in the mid-90s, a Christian in Maple Ridge BC once had the audacity to suggest that the public was divided on issues pertaining to homosexuality.
So, is there some sort of an election going on, or something?